Open main menu

Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/440

This page needs to be proofread.

434 Cases ruled and adjudged in the I793· jurihliflions, and agreeable ta lbeprineyblee emel ufige: gf Iaw." %¢~es• `Ihefc words refer as well to the Supreme Court as to the other Courts of the United Stare:. Whatever writs we illue, that are necelfary for the exercife of our jurifdiétion, mull: be agreeable to the prinemler and aybger gf Ia·w. This is a direéiion, I apprehend, we cannot fupercede, bccaufe it may appear to us not fuflicientlyextenfive. If it be not, we mult wait till o- ther remedies are provided by the fame authority. From this it is plain that the Legillature did not ehufe to leave to our own difcrction the path to jullice, but has prefcribed one of its own. In doing fo, it has, I thinlt, wifely, referred us to prin- ciples and ufages of law already well known, and -by their pre- ciliou calculated to guard againlt that innovating fpirit of Courts of Jullice, which the Attorney-General in another cafe repro- hated with fo much warmth, and with whofe fentiments in that particular, I mol]: cordially join. The principles of law to which reference is to be had, either upon the general ground I iirft alluded to, or upon the fpecial words I have above cited, from the judicial ad}, Iapprehend, can be, either, Thofe of the particular laws of the State, agairilt which the fait is brought. Or, ad. Principles of law common to all the States. I omit any coniideration ariling from the word “ ufages," tho' a {till {ironger expreflion. In regard to the principles of the particular laws of the State of Georgia, if they in any manner differed. fo as to elfeét this queltion, from the principles of law, common to all the States, it might be material to enquire, whether, there would be any propriety or congruity in laying down zi rule of decilion which wouldinduce this eonfequence, that an a€tion would lie in the Supreme Court againll: fome States, whofe laws admitted of a compulfory remedy againll: their own Governments, but not againll: others, wherein no fuch remedy was admitted, or which would require, perhaps, if the principle was received, fifteen different methods of pro- ccediug againft States, all {handing in the lame political relation to the general Government, and none having any pretence to a-diilinclion in its favor, or jullzly liable to any diltinélion to its prejudice. If any fuch ditierence exiiled in the laws of the dillercnt States, there would feem to be a propriety, in order . to induce uniformity, (if a Conliitutional power for that put'- pofe cxills), that Caugref lhould pt·eii:ribe a rule, littetl to this new cafe, to which no equal, uniform, aud impartial mode of proceeding could otherwife be applied. But this point, lcouceive, it is unnecelliiry to determine, hecaufel believe there is no doubt that neither in the State now in queliion, nor in anyotlzar in the Union, any particular Le- giilative mode, authoiiling a compulfory fuit for the recovery of money agaitlit a State, was in being either when the Con{litu· tron